Jesus's claims to divinity?

[kepha1]

Can you show me in scripture where it says to celebrate christmas or easter?

I can show you in scripture where the Jews celebrated certain feast days by God’s command. Like Yom Kippur or Rosh Hashanna. Do you believe the Resurrection is less important than Jewish feast days? The Jews followed a lunar calender, and so do we. Did you know this is the reason why Easter does not allways fall on the same date? Our spiritual ancestors were Jewish Christians of the 1st century. Too bad you don’t have any.

Can you show me how the CC came up with the days chosen for these holidays?

Yes, is that an issue? The CC also changed New Years Day from April 1 to January 1, so if you are so opposed to Catholicism, why don’t you celebrate New Years Day on April 1st?

Do you not understand that the only thing that matters is salvation? Do you not understand that everytime a soul is saved from death, the angels in heaven rejoice?

Yes, I think Catholics get this message more often than you think. It’s not our fault you only read anti-Catholic garbage and don’t know what matters to Catholics.

The earth is a battle ground for the souls of men. We are to rejoice in God’s gift of salvation. We are to remember the last supper as commanded by Jesus. I don’t recall it being called easter.

I recall Jesus revealing himself in the breaking of the bread. (Luke 24:35) Isn’t amazing how a mere symbol can casue to see what is in front of their eyes all along? Do you think the Jews sacrificed symbolic lambs and pretended to eat it as part of the Passover Meal?
SHOCKING NEWS!!! the term “Easter” appears mostly in Protestant Bibles, not very many Catholic ones.

As for celebrating pagan holidays, sorry, but not gonna happen. I celebate the holidays set down by this nation such as memorial day and labor day. Yet, these were established by this government and do not violate anything pertaining to the Lord.

So you admit to being a cult follower. That’s ok. But if we take away your right to lie about the facts of history, you wouldn’t have much to say. I notice you refuse to document the source of your information, on this forum, and on the Seventh Day Adventist forum that I abandoned last week, a forum I left because of its demonic hatred for Our Blessed Mom.

The reason why you refuse to document your sources is because they can easily be discredited as liars, and you probably know this, or can’t tell the difference between the truth and lies. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and lean towards the former.

Did you know that there was a time Christmas was not allowed in the U.S.? Neither was the catholic religion.

Did you know that there was a time when the Catholic religion was illegal in pagan Rome? England? Scotland? and dozens of other places?

Do you think the Ku Klux Klan was right in its persecution of Catholics?

 

[Michael007]

I’m surprised at the number of posts on this topic. All one has to say is “I AM”.
Jesus said it. Only God can say it. If Jesus isn’t part of the Trinity with God then he has just commited blashemy as he was accused. Just watch the movie “The Passion” for the example. The whole Gospel of John proves the Trinity. Without it the historic Jews were correct. Not much more debate needed.

 

[heiscominginthe]

**Yes, I am saying that **

ONLY** the Catholic Church has the authority to declare canon with the guidance of the holy Spirit (John 16:12-15). Jesus established only ONE Church**** – ONE authority (Matt. 16:15-19, 18:15-18, John 16:12-15, 21:20-23) – and he doesn’t** make mistakes.

Christ is the head of the church. He alone has authority. The CC uses it’s authority that was instituted by interaction with the roman empire, thus creating what history depicts as the holy roman empire.

When will your eyes be opened to understand that the church has always been since Christ established it. It was not established by the CC. It was the church in the days of the apostles, it was the church throughout the middle ages, and it is the church today. It is not the catholic, presbyterian, methodist, church of Christ, Jehovah witness and so and and so forth. IT it the Church.

Do you believe the church in heaven is called the catholic church or the Church of Jesus Christ, established on the gospel of Jesus Christ?

You ask if I believe that Jesus frowns on man made holidays, rituals? What does it say in scripture about man made holidays that are intergrated with paganism and desires of the flesh?? God hates it. NOT ONE PLACE does it tell us in scripture to celebrate the birth of Jesus. Don’t you think if it was to be, then the exact date would indeed be known?

As for easter, the very name is an abomination unto the Lord. The true title is the last supper, the partaking of the bread and wine in rememberance of what OUR LORD did for us on the cross.

As for the OSAS teachings, it is good that we agree on this. For this false teaching will claim many in the name of hell.

 

[heiscominginthe]

I can show you in scripture where the Jews celebrated certain feast days by God’s command. Like Yom Kippur or Rosh Hashanna. Do you believe the Resurrection is less important than Jewish feast days? The Jews followed a lunar calender, and so do we. Did you know this is the reason why Easter does not allways fall on the same date? Our spiritual ancestors were Jewish Christians of the 1st century. Too bad you don’t have any.

You are missing the point. The very word easter is an abomination unto the Lord. This name was taken from a pagan holiday called easter. My dispute is not when it is actually observed, but that it is called easter, not the Last Supper.

As for the resurrection, it is all that is important.

Yes, is that an issue? The CC also changed New Years Day from April 1 to January 1, so if you are so opposed to Catholicism, why don’t you celebrate New Years Day on April 1st?
Yes, I think Catholics get this message more often than you think. It’s not our fault you only read anti-Catholic garbage and don’t know what matters to Catholics.
I recall Jesus revealing himself in the breaking of the bread. (Luke 24:35) Isn’t amazing how a mere symbol can casue to see what is in front of their eyes all along? Do you think the Jews sacrificed symbolic lambs and pretended to eat it as part of the Passover Meal?
SHOCKING NEWS!!! the term “Easter” appears mostly in Protestant Bibles, not very many Catholic ones.
So you admit to being a cult follower. That’s ok. But if we take away your right to lie about the facts of history, you wouldn’t have much to say. I notice you refuse to document the source of your information, on this forum, and on the Seventh Day Adventist forum that I abandoned last week, a forum I left because of its demonic hatred for Our Blessed Mom.

If you know the Word of God, and if you knew history, you would know that the reason why the word easter is found in the Authorized King James bible is because it was talking about the pagan holiday easter that occured at the same time as passover.

As for lying, I will ask the Lord to forgive you, for you know not what you are saying when you call me a liar. You don’t have a clue as to my stand, but I will give you a hint, IT IS WRITTEN.

The reason why you refuse to document your sources is because they can easily be discredited as liars, and you probably know this, or can’t tell the difference between the truth and lies. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and lean towards the former.

What sources do you what me to give? I can give the one that matters. AKJBible

Did you know that there was a time when the Catholic religion was illegal in pagan Rome? England? Scotland? and dozens of other places?

Do you think the Ku Klux Klan was right in its persecution of Catholics?

Only when nations decided to prevent the catholic religion into their lands were the people able to breathe much easier since they were free of persecution of the CC.

Let me ask you this one question? Is Jesus Christ, the Word of God, the bible?

 

[heiscominginthe]

I’m surprised at the number of posts on this topic. All one has to say is “I AM”.
Jesus said it. Only God can say it. If Jesus isn’t part of the Trinity with God then he has just commited blashemy as he was accused. Just watch the movie “The Passion” for the example. The whole Gospel of John proves the Trinity. Without it the historic Jews were correct. Not much more debate needed.

Firstly, the word trinity does not appear in the Holy Writ. Secondly, the reason why people choose to accept the trinity doctrine is because of their lack of understanding the Word of 'God.

Yet, I cannot fault one for this stand, nor can I say one is sinning by believing it.

This is my argument in bringing understanding.

It is written that Jesus Christ is the Word of God. Scripture tells us he is the beginning. I believe that before creation, nothing physical existed. God spoke, and his Son was begotten.

So the question is, did the Son exist prior to the Father speaking him into existance, to being begotten of the Father? So we must ask ourselves, before being spoken existed only a thought. So can it be said that the Son always has been, even if he only existed as a mere thought? To say yes is to say one knows the mind of God. To say know is to say one knows the mind of God.

So what is the right response? To say what is written, without adding or taking away from the Word of God.

 

[Watchman]

Sorry, bub, but Christmas, Christ Mass, is a pagan holiday started by the CC because there was another religion that practiced a holiday …

The alignment of Christian holidays with existing pagan celebrations does not mean that Christmas was a pagan celebration. For example, the Pantheon was converted to a christian church around the year 600. Though the church occupied the the same physical location, it is nevertheless fully Christian and no longer a pagan temple. The same can be said of holidays. The calendar date may align with prior pagan celebrations (and even that is debatable) but the celebration itself is purely Christian.

 

[elvisman]

Christ is the head of the church. He alone has authority. The CC uses it’s authority that was instituted by interaction with the roman empire, thus creating what history depicts as the holy roman empire.

Tell me something – what do YOU make of the passages I provided that show Jesus giving the Church Authority here on earth?* I want to hear YOUR*** take on the following:**

In Matt. 16:15-19, Jesus tells Peter that whatever he holds bound and loosed on earth will be bound and loosed in heaven.

**In Matt. 18:15-18, Jesus tells the Apostles that the CHURCH has the final say on earth. He also tells them that whatever they hold bound and loosed on earth will be bound and loosed in heaven.

John 16:12-15, 21:20-23***, Jesus tells the apostles that there is much he needs to tell them but they are not ready to hear it. He goes on to tell them that the holy Spirit will guide them to ALL truth about the things that are coming and that he (the Holy Spirit) will take from what is Jesus’ and declare it to them (the Apostles, the Church).***

As for the Roman empire - that’s a load of unsubstantiated garbage. Unless you can prove it – don’t waste my time or anybody else’s.

When will your eyes be opened to understand that the church has always been since Christ established it. It was not established by the CC. It was the church in the days of the apostles, it was the church throughout the middle ages, and it is the church today. It is not the catholic, presbyterian, methodist, church of Christ, Jehovah witness and so and and so forth. IT it the Church.

The Catholic Church IS the Church. the rest of the splinter sects – to which YOU belong are separated from that ONE true Church. I can prove it, whereas YOU can’t.

Do you believe the church in heaven is called the catholic church or the Church of Jesus Christ, established on the gospel of Jesus Christ?

**You just **don’t get it, do you? There is only ONE Church – the Catholic Church that Jesus established. There IS no other Church - on heaven or on earth – only divorced factions from that one true Church.

You ask if I believe that Jesus frowns on man made holidays, rituals? What does it say in scripture about man made holidays that are intergrated with paganism and desires of the flesh?? God hates it. NOT ONE PLACE does it tell us in scripture to celebrate the birth of Jesus. Don’t you think if it was to be, then the exact date would indeed be known

As for easter, the very name is an abomination unto the Lord. The true title is the last supper, the partaking of the bread and wine in rememberance of what OUR LORD did for us on the cross.
As for the OSAS teachings, it is good that we agree on this. For this false teaching will claim many in the name of hell.
Show me where - in Scripture - that celebrating Jesus’ birth and resurrection are an abomination befor God. IF you can show me - I’ll stop celebrating it and will join your Church today.

Yes, my friend -*** false***** teachings will claim many in the name of hell . . .**

 

[elvisman]

The alignment of Christian holidays with existing pagan celebrations does not mean that Christmas was a pagan celebration. For example, the Pantheon was converted to a christian church around the year 600. Though the church occupied the the same physical location, it is nevertheless fully Christian and no longer a pagan temple. The same can be said of holidays. The calendar date may align with prior pagan celebrations (and even that is debatable) but the celebration itself is purely Christian.

Good post!
**This is about the weakest argument that Heiscominginthe has made yet on this thread. **

We’re not allowed to replace something pagan or otherwise evil with something good?
Where is that in Scripture?

 

[elvisman]

You are missing the point. The very word easter is an abomination unto the Lord. This name was taken from a pagan holiday called easter. My dispute is not when it is actually observed, but that it is called easter, not the Last Supper.
As for the resurrection, it is all that is important.

If you know the Word of God, and if you knew history, you would know that the reason why the word easter is found in the Authorized King James bible is because it was talking about the pagan holiday easter that occured at the same time as passover.

WRONG.
"Ostern/Easter" is most likely derived from "erstehen", which is the old Teutonic (Germanic) form of “auferstehen/auferstehung” meaning “resurrection”.

You may not know it (my guess is that you don’t) - but you get most of your anti-Catholic views from two heavily debunked and almost comical books, "The Two Babylons", by Alexander Hislop, and "Roman Catholicism", by Lorainne Boettner. Both of these books are based on shoddy historical “research”, bitter opinions and outright lies.

In the case of Hislop’s book - it was actually debunked by one of his most ardent former followers, Ralph Woodrow.

Do yourself a favor, friend - do your homework before posting such ridiculous nonsense.
It’s getting embarassing . . .

 

[JP_Marat]

The honorific title “Son of God” is not in itself proof of divinity.

See Catholic Encyclopedia: newadvent.org/cathen/14142b.htm

Summary:
" The title “son of God” is frequent in the Old Testament. …The title “son of God” was applied in the Old Testament to persons having any special relationship with God. Angels, just and pious men, the descendants of Seth, were called “sons of God” (Job 1:6; 2:1; Psalm 88:7; Wisdom 2:13; etc.). In a similar manner it was given to Israelites (Deuteronomy 14:50); and of Israel, as a nation, we read: “And thou shalt say to him: Thus saith the Lord: Israel is my son, my firstborn. I have said to thee: Let my son go, that he may serve me” (Exodus 4:22 sq.).

Question: Would the Hebrews have allowed Jesus’ original followers to remain a Temple worshipping sect within Judaism if they had claimed that Jesus was divine?

When did it begin to be claimed that Jesus was more than simply a messiah - that he himself was divine?

Answer: About 85 AD. It’s first mentioned in the Gospel of John (c 95-110 AD). The Christians were subsequently excluded from the Jewish synagogues as apostates (minim).

NB: From Acts of the Apostles (c 80 AD)) chapter 2:

"You who are Israelites, hear these words. Jesus the Nazorean was a man commended to you by God with mighty deeds, wonders, and signs, which God worked through him in your midst, as you yourselves know.

This man, delivered up by the set plan and foreknowledge of God, you killed, using lawless men to crucify him.

But God raised him up, releasing him from the throes of death, because it was impossible for him to be held by it." (NAB)

In short, Jesus was a man through whom God worked signs, just like other prophets. He was raised from the dead like Lazarus by God’s power, not his own.

 

[Michael007]

Firstly, the word trinity does not appear in the Holy Writ. Secondly, the reason why people choose to accept the trinity doctrine is because of their lack of understanding the Word of 'God.

---

Where in the Bible does it say that every belief has to come from the Bible (Holy Writ) alone?

Does your Bible even have Matthew 28:19-20? “Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit”? What is that but what later Christians (Catholics) called the Trinity? This belief was made official in 325 A.D. There were disputes on this as with other beliefs. But the church made this the official teaching with strong scriptural evidence (the above scripture being one). Does your church go by the book of Acts which mentions Baptising in the name of the Christ? You over ride a Gospel with Acts? And can’t you think that in Acts they are just being a little lazy with their writing? And since Jesus is with God and the holy Spirit they obviously meat to go by Matthew.

I do not know what church you belong to. But what gives them the authority to over ride the original churches decision only 290 years after the death of Christ?

 

[Dan_Parker]

heiscominginthe;5717784:

Firstly, the word trinity does not appear in the Holy Writ. Secondly, the reason why people choose to accept the trinity doctrine is because of their lack of understanding the Word of 'God.

---

Where in the Bible does it say that every belief has to come from the Bible (Holy Writ) alone?

Does your Bible even have Matthew 28:19-20? “Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit”? What is that but what later Christians (Catholics) called the Trinity? This belief was made official in 325 A.D. There were disputes on this as with other beliefs. But the church made this the official teaching with strong scriptural evidence (the above scripture being one). Does your church go by the book of Acts which mentions Baptising in the name of the Christ? You over ride a Gospel with Acts? And can’t you think that in Acts they are just being a little lazy with their writing? And since Jesus is with God and the holy Spirit they obviously meat to go by Matthew.

I do not know what church you belong to. But what gives them the authority to over ride the original churches decision only 290 years after the death of Christ?

Why do you think that because the Father, Son and holy spirit are mentioned together that they are the same being? When Peter, James and John are mentioned together are they the same being?

 

[teak421]

Michael007;5722123:

Why do you think that because the Father, Son and holy spirit are mentioned together that they are the same being? When Peter, James and John are mentioned together are they the same being?

You *might *have a point if it was in the nameS of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

• Michael

 

[heiscominginthe]

The alignment of Christian holidays with existing pagan celebrations does not mean that Christmas was a pagan celebration. For example, the Pantheon was converted to a christian church around the year 600. Though the church occupied the the same physical location, it is nevertheless fully Christian and no longer a pagan temple. The same can be said of holidays. The calendar date may align with prior pagan celebrations (and even that is debatable) but the celebration itself is purely Christian.

Regardless, the holidays were given from God to the Jews in the OT. Anything the Jews created without God sanctioning, thus not honored of God.

So can be said of the holiday christmas or Christ mass. It is man originated, unsanctioned by God, thus not honored by God. Not one place is scripture supports this man made festival.

 

[heiscominginthe]

heiscominginthe;5717784:

Firstly, the word trinity does not appear in the Holy Writ. Secondly, the reason why people choose to accept the trinity doctrine is because of their lack of understanding the Word of 'God.

---

Where in the Bible does it say that every belief has to come from the Bible (Holy Writ) alone?

Does your Bible even have Matthew 28:19-20? “Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit”? What is that but what later Christians (Catholics) called the Trinity? This belief was made official in 325 A.D. There were disputes on this as with other beliefs. But the church made this the official teaching with strong scriptural evidence (the above scripture being one). Does your church go by the book of Acts which mentions Baptising in the name of the Christ? You over ride a Gospel with Acts? And can’t you think that in Acts they are just being a little lazy with their writing? And since Jesus is with God and the holy Spirit they obviously meat to go by Matthew.

I do not know what church you belong to. But what gives them the authority to over ride the original churches decision only 290 years after the death of Christ?

There is far more scriptures that debunk the trinity doctrine than support it. If you like, I will list them all or at least the amount I have accummulated to date.

 

[teak421]

Regardless, the holidays were given from God to the Jews in the OT. Anything the Jews created without God sanctioning, thus not honored of God.

So can be said of the holiday christmas or Christ mass. It is man originated, unsanctioned by God, thus not honored by God. Not one place is scripture supports this man made festival.

The absence of evidence does not prove the subject either way… Therefore, do you have any Scriptural references that prove that God will not honor Christmas. I am very interested in your proof text, especially from the New Testament?

• Michael

 

[teak421]

Michael007;5722123:

There is far more scriptures that debunk the trinity doctrine than support it. If you like, I will list them all or at least the amount I have accummulated to date.

First things first. Can you make a case with Scripture ONLY that everything concerning the Christian Deposit of Faith is in the Bible? Do you have any evidence that suggests the Word of God is in written form only?

While I disagree with your premise about Scripture not being able to support the Trinity, we must go deeper… Is everything Christian derived from the Bible… and… if you believe that, where does the Bible actually say it?

Finally, you might consider reading some early Church fathers… They rejected as heretical the view that I think you hold.

Just an FYI. You do know that the same Church that rejected the heretical views of Arianism was also the same Church that put the Bible you now hold in your hand… Why do you accept the authority of the Church for your Bible (canon) but not with its decision on rejecting Arianism.

• Michael

 

[teak421]

Michael007;5722123:

There is far more scriptures that debunk the trinity doctrine than support it. If you like, I will list them all or at least the amount I have accummulated to date.

Additionally, please read the Epistles on the Arian Heresy by Alexander of Alexandria. Him, along with 100 other bishops flat out rejected Arias and his followers. Additionally, if you read the text, it does a great job of saying WHY its wrong.

Here’s a quote that I think is interesting:

6. Since, therefore, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has thus Himself exhorted us, and by His apostle hath signified such things to us; we, who have heard their impiety with our own ears, have consistently anathematized such men, as I have already said, and have declared them to be aliens from the Catholic Church and faith, and we have made known the thing, beloved and most honoured fellow-ministers, to your piety, that you should not receive any of them, should they venture rashly to come unto you, and that you should not trust Eusebius or any one else who writes concerning them.

Here we clearly see the Catholic Church rejecting the heretical view of Arianism. And, just 60 or so years later, this same Catholic Church created the Canon which you now hold in your hand. Why do you accept one judgment of the Church (Bible Canonization), but not the other (rejecting as heresy Arianism)?

• Michael